Sunday, 5 May 2013


When will people get the clue that terrorists are just criminals like anyone else. They need action taking against them, but no reason for it to be out of proportion to what they do. They are lower risk of hurting people than car drivers by orders of magnitude.

I have no idea if this story is true (see image). But the concern is that stories like this, and similar stupid stories of abuse of terrorism laws, are serving to change the way people behave in their daily life. People are scared of speaking their mind. The fact that other laws like the Telecoms Act were used to attack a tweeter is all part of this crap.

The fact that there are groups of people scaring the population in to changing the way they live, creating fear and intimidation, means there are terrorists - people creating terror. Sadly it is the governments and law makers and police that are causing this fear. People are afraid they will be victim of terrorism laws or interpretation of those laws by police. So they (the governments and the police) are, by any definition, the terrorists - creating the terror - no? Or have I misunderstood what terrorism means.

I am not at all afraid of being the victim of some bombing - I know the stats - it is not going to happen. But I worry about taking my big camera to London for fear of an argument. I feel sure I'll win the argument (or get a good blog post out of it), but that feels to me like a real risk of something happening. It is probably also statistically unlikely, but that is far more of a fear for me than being bombed. So who is creating the terror there exactly?

I thought that America was one place you could speak your mind - freedom of speech. Is that no longer true?


  1. I can see the thing about big cameras attracting the wrong sort of attraction as I've been questioned by police more than once while using a D700 DSLR. At least you can now get decent compact cameras like the Sony RX1 which are a bit more discreet than a huge DSLR.

  2. Typically the US state courses terrorism (Not only with drone attacks) but the fact is these people are low lifes who are setup and given the stuff. then the FBI etc posts a huge press release on how they protected us all when in reality it's far from it.

    and don't get me started on CISPA!

  3. It's the latest bogey man. Just like 'think of the children'. The politicians consider throwing a few teenagers under the bus a fair price to pay for giving them the power to do basically what they like.

    The UK is no better, to be honest.

  4. I wouldn't be surprised to see the charges fail here, thanks to the First Amendment - there is an exception for "shouting fire in a crowded theatre", but courts take a very narrow view of that. Schools - although mostly government-operated - can have tighter restrictions internally (he could well be expelled for it, or put in detention or whatever) - but on the facts in this excerpt, I can't imagine criminal charges sticking.

    A dumb move on his part, certainly, and it wouldn't be unreasonable for Facebook to eject him from their service, but arresting the idiot seems excessive, not to mention playing into his hands by giving him the attention he was presumably seeking.

    1. Hopefully you are right - but the very fact that this is a story, that he has even been charged, creates the very fear and panic that I am talking about. Just harassing the public like this is terrorism!